Riley

Joined

• started 16 topics
• posted 427 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Riley

• 
  25

  JW s were here today with convention invite

  by enoughisenough in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i thought i would tell this story: 2 gals and a guy came by with invitation to convention.

  i am in the yard.

  the gals get out and are wearing pants.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  The Irony is the theme of the assembly is " Sharing the Good News " or the the gospel.

  JWs have no gospel. Heck, the new testament isn't even written for them. It is just for the annointed who are represented by the faithful slave.
  
• 
  27

  Assembly Attendence

  by Riley in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am in western canada.

  we use to have our assembly in saskatoon.

  our assembly has moved to medicine hat.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  I always thought the Saskatoon attendance figures would be a pretty good measure of the health and strength of the organization. At least in my world. A province of 1 million people, 5000 show up to the assembly.
  

  My more generation observation was the moving of assemblies might be more of a shell game to mask any declines in the organization. Just my two cents.
  
• 
  27

  Assembly Attendence

  by Riley in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am in western canada.

  we use to have our assembly in saskatoon.

  our assembly has moved to medicine hat.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  The question I had was Calgary alone is 1.3 million people. Are only selective congs going to this assembly ? 3400 people in an area with a population of maybe 1.8 people doesn't seem that great.

  Now a lot of the older ones are no attending anymore. JWs are covid and you follow the numbers and hope things are trending down.
  
• 
  27

  Assembly Attendence

  by Riley in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i am in western canada.

  we use to have our assembly in saskatoon.

  our assembly has moved to medicine hat.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  I am in Western Canada. We use to have our assembly in Saskatoon. Our assembly has moved to Medicine Hat. They are saying that maybe 3500 people were in attendance. I saw a lot of young families which was kind of depressing.

  Then I started to do a little asking about how far people had travelled and the assembly was basically Calgary, Southern Alberta, Western Saskatchewan and the East part of BC. Man, this seems to be an awful lot of terrority for 3500 people.

  I think there might be a little bamboozling going on. If this religion is shrinking, how much more travelling and time and money are we going to shell out so we can be standing arm to arm with 5000 people.
  
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  The trinity is the early church fathers trying to reconcile the idea that Jesus is the physical manifestation of god in the Old Testament, the fact Paul is applying the YHWH to christ and Jesus is called god, yet Jesus seems to be in subjection to god. I don’t think there is anything short slighted or sinister about it.

  If you believe the bible is total bullshit, that is fine. I don’t can’t stand the selective narcissism of the watchtower . There is literally no idea of the bible narrative.
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  Mathew 28 19. There is your three in a single verse and a pretty important one as well.

  Wow, that is kind of a drop the mic moment , wouldn’t you say boogerman.
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  Hebrews 7:3 I think literally says Jesus has no beginning or end.
  
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  I guess if we isolate verses and pretend we are Greek experts and ignore the Jews wanting to kill Jesus because he was claiming he was claiming God as his father thus making himself equal with god. Or the whole glorify the son as the father, jesus creating the everything in the world etc etc.

  You would think if god created Jesus, the bible would have been more clear on the subject, instead of a proverb, a line in the book of revelation ( which could mean supreme ruler ) or a verse Colossians which more likely means era to humanity.

  Why doesn't the bible start with god created Jesus and Jesus created everything, instead of " let us create man in our image ".
  
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07fprxcX25E

  I don't like posting videos but also hate the idea of an ex-jw board being feed with jw nonsense.
  
• 
  171

  Alteration of Revelation 3:14 in the 4th century to support the emerging Trinity doctrine

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.

  this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.

  the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Riley

  I have never really thought the bible narrative was really pointing towards the idea that God created an Angel , who then created everything. It kind of makes God look like a lazy bastard. It seems more like the invisible omnipotent god who can not tolerate sin became a visible touchable manifestation outside of himself to have contact with sinful humanity.

  A verse that has kind of puzzled me was at the end of the bible " 3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him.".

  God and the Lamb seems to be referred to as the same person. Weird.